Nope. I'm sure his play for Detroit doesn't impact your opinion of him at all.
A very misleading statement, as Rafalski never received serious consideration for the award while Blake actually did. Top ten Norris trophy finishes:
Blake: 1, 3, 3, 4, 5, 8
Rafalski: 9, 9, 9
Blake was clearly better.
You don't think Rafalski was a #1 defenseman? Even though he finished 9th, 9th and 9th for the Norris Trophy? He was the Devils #1 after the last lockout and wasn't too shabby at it. As for the poll though, easily Blake.
Blake was obviously better but i think Rafalski is being very underrated. IMO he was a top quality defender for a very long time. He may of got a late start but he was elite in every season. I think he's a Hall of Famer. He's better than Dan Boyle ever was IMO.
Blake is a little better but Rafalski is extremely underrated. He's just as good as guys like Al MacInnis and Scott Niedermeyer despite never getting that kind of love
Blake is a little better but Rafalski is extremely underrated. He's just as good as guys like Al MacInnis and Scott Niedermeyer despite never getting that kind of love
Rafalski isn't anywhere close to MacInnis or Niedermayer, but neither is Blake.
Rafalski isn't anywhere close to MacInnis or Niedermayer, but neither is Blake.
IMHO Rafalski was a lot closer to Niedermayer than he's given credit for. Niedermayer is/was horribly overrated (especially defensively), while Rafalski was not given proper credit (especially defensively). Offensively, they were very close in ability; Rafalski actually outscored Niedermayer four of the five years they played together in New Jersey, and two of four years after Niedermayer left. That's six of nine seasons where Rafalski was the more prolific scorer. Niedermayer was better defensively, but not enough to the degree where he should be considered a top-20 all-time defenseman while Rafalski doesn't even get HHOF consideration.
IMHO, Blake and Rafalski were right in the same range. Both had a good prime as strong top-tier offensive defensemen just outside the elite category. Niedermayer is just above that range, as his prime places him as a legitimate Norris contender. I don't personally believe he or Blake deserved the Norris; Blake I don't even consider top-ten for 1997-98 (Lidstrom/Pronger/Bourque as finalists) and Niedermayer I would rank fifth-best for 2003-04 (Lidstrom/Pronger/Chara).
IMHO Rafalski was a lot closer to Niedermayer than he's given credit for. Niedermayer is/was horribly overrated (especially defensively), while Rafalski was not given proper credit (especially defensively). Offensively, they were very close in ability; Rafalski actually outscored Niedermayer four of the five years they played together in New Jersey, and two of four years after Niedermayer left. That's six of nine seasons where Rafalski was the more prolific scorer. Niedermayer was better defensively, but not enough to the degree where he should be considered a top-20 all-time defenseman while Rafalski doesn't even get HHOF consideration.
IMHO, Blake and Rafalski were right in the same range. Both had a good prime as strong top-tier offensive defensemen just outside the elite category. Niedermayer is just above that range, as his prime places him as a legitimate Norris contender. I don't personally believe he or Blake deserved the Norris; Blake I don't even consider top-ten for 1997-98 (Lidstrom/Pronger/Bourque as finalists) and Niedermayer I would rank fifth-best for 2003-04 (Lidstrom/Pronger/Chara).
I think Niedermayer was at his best in Anaheim though. I can't imagine Rafalski having that kind of impact for the Ducks. Some fans think that #27 should be retired, even though he only played five years for the club, that's how good he was there.
IMHO Rafalski was a lot closer to Niedermayer than he's given credit for. Niedermayer is/was horribly overrated (especially defensively), while Rafalski was not given proper credit (especially defensively). Offensively, they were very close in ability; Rafalski actually outscored Niedermayer four of the five years they played together in New Jersey, and two of four years after Niedermayer left. That's six of nine seasons where Rafalski was the more prolific scorer. Niedermayer was better defensively, but not enough to the degree where he should be considered a top-20 all-time defenseman while Rafalski doesn't even get HHOF consideration.
IMHO, Blake and Rafalski were right in the same range. Both had a good prime as strong top-tier offensive defensemen just outside the elite category. Niedermayer is just above that range, as his prime places him as a legitimate Norris contender. I don't personally believe he or Blake deserved the Norris; Blake I don't even consider top-ten for 1997-98 (Lidstrom/Pronger/Bourque as finalists) and Niedermayer I would rank fifth-best for 2003-04 (Lidstrom/Pronger/Chara).
I'm not going to talk about Niedermayer's entire career, but at his best Niedermayer was able to go head-to-head with Lidstrom. He was shutting down top line opposition, and putting up great offensive numbers(and in Anaheim he did it while playing primarily with Anaheim's shutdown line).
You might not think Rafalski is getting enough credit, but you're absolutely denying Niedermayer credit he deserves on defense.
I think Stevens would stomp him. The only people likely to vote for Blake are Colorado or San Jose fans.
Sharks fans don't really care for Blake. He sucked in his 2 years here. But, the play and talent gap between Stevens and Blake is much shorter than the gap between Blake and Rafalski.
Sharks fans don't really care for Blake. He sucked in his 2 years here. But, the play and talent gap between Stevens and Blake is much shorter than the gap between Blake and Rafalski.
That doesn't necessarily mean much in a poll. If a player is better, even slightly, and everyone agrees, the poll is going to be lopsided. Stevens was just a monster on the blue line.
IMHO Rafalski was a lot closer to Niedermayer than he's given credit for. Niedermayer is/was horribly overrated (especially defensively), while Rafalski was not given proper credit (especially defensively). Offensively, they were very close in ability; Rafalski actually outscored Niedermayer four of the five years they played together in New Jersey, and two of four years after Niedermayer left. That's six of nine seasons where Rafalski was the more prolific scorer. Niedermayer was better defensively, but not enough to the degree where he should be considered a top-20 all-time defenseman while Rafalski doesn't even get HHOF consideration.
IMHO, Blake and Rafalski were right in the same range. Both had a good prime as strong top-tier offensive defensemen just outside the elite category. Niedermayer is just above that range, as his prime places him as a legitimate Norris contender. I don't personally believe he or Blake deserved the Norris; Blake I don't even consider top-ten for 1997-98 (Lidstrom/Pronger/Bourque as finalists) and Niedermayer I would rank fifth-best for 2003-04 (Lidstrom/Pronger/Chara).
I agree about Niedermayer for the most part, but as a few others have said his peak was so high that it completely separates him from someone like Rafalski. I also agree that Blake shouldn't have won the Norris, but not that Niedermayer should have lost. If Rafalski has a peak roughly equivalent to Niedermayer's he would be comfortably ahead of Blake.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhillyBluesFan
Rafalski is just as good as Niedermayer and MacInnis and Blake is a little better than all 3.
I would love to see your evidence for either of those claims, if you don't mind.
Sharks fans don't really care for Blake. He sucked in his 2 years here.
Except he didn't. He and Vlasic were outstanding in his first season here. He played below expectations in his 2nd season (due to injuries), but his shot was still a huge threat and he was still physically dominant.
Except he didn't. He and Vlasic were outstanding in his first season here. He played below expectations in his 2nd season (due to injuries), but his shot was still a huge threat and he was still physically dominant.
Vlasic can make any offensive-minded roamer look good. Blake wasn't good in his own end here in SJ.
__________________
Exhibit A as to how hockey doesn't matter on ESPN:
Last night an ESPN program was discussing how the Detroit Pistons needed a hero citing the heroes on the Detroit Tigers, Detroit Lions and no mention of the Detroit Red Wings. All this despite the Red Wings probably being the most succesful team in Detroit right now.
I'm not going to talk about Niedermayer's entire career, but at his best Niedermayer was able to go head-to-head with Lidstrom. He was shutting down top line opposition, and putting up great offensive numbers(and in Anaheim he did it while playing primarily with Anaheim's shutdown line).
Niedermayer/Beauchemin was the shutdown line? So Salei and Vishnevski were what, the offensive unit? Or Pronger/Salei, after Pronger got there? Niedermayer's pair was the OFFENSIVE pairing. He may have been solid defensively, but they used him for offense. It is shown in his 60+ point seasons.
But still, Niedermayer was never anywhere near Lidstrom's universe defensively. And 2003-04 - when Lidstrom scored only 38 points - is the only season where Niedermayer outscored Lidstrom. Lidstrom's average outside of that season is 61 points per 82 games. Niedermayer's total that season? 54 points, one of only four years in his career that he scored 50+.
Myth: Peak Niedermayer was as good as Peak Lidstrom.
Reality: Average Lidstrom was better than Peak Niedermayer.
Quote:
You might not think Rafalski is getting enough credit, but you're absolutely denying Niedermayer credit he deserves on defense.
I have said Niedermayer was a solid defensive defenseman. What I am not willing to do is say that he was some kind of defensive stalwart on the level of a Langway, Konstantinov, etc. Scott Niedermayer was Duncan Keith. A swift-skating defenseman capable of playing high-level defense but whose best skills and primary use is for offense. The main difference between the two is that Keith deserved his Norris.
